funcrunch
-
Posts
260 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by funcrunch
-
-
<p>A friend of mine (who also happens to be a client) posted a hypothetical question on Facebook yesterday, and she and I have been going back and forth a bit on the answer. I asked for and received her permission to post the original question here:</p>
<p>"If I hand my camera to a stranger and ask them to take a picture of me (with someone, in front of a landmark, whatever) who owns the copyright?"</p>
<p>My answer was that, from my understanding, the photographer would legally own the copyright, even if as a practical matter proof that s/he took the photo would be impossible. My friend and her fiance stated that if they handed the stranger their equipment and had no way to contact them, said photographer appeared to be giving up his right of ownership. So if the photo turned out to be valuable, the camera owner could sell the photo, and the photographer, assuming they somehow found out, would have no recourse.</p>
<p>I'm interested in others' take on this scenario.</p>
<p> </p>
-
<blockquote>
<p>I've also seen the notices that Marios refers too, especially at ticketed private events where it is a condition of entry (no chance of even opting out in this case).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I've seen these notices too, but I certainly wouldn't expect one at a public library, unless a special event were going on there at the time. That would just be odd.</p>
-
<blockquote>
<p>我是从火星肖像和婚礼摄影师<br />I am a portrait and wedding photographer from Mars</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Ashley's photo.net bio has now been replaced with the above sentence as well. Has she been hacked or are we being punked?</p>
-
<blockquote>
<p>I live in Vermont, and in this progressive state not photographing lesbian and gay couples is a very poor business decision, regardless of your belief system.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I wonder if that's why the OP wants to find some legal way to avoid having same-sex couples ask for and receive her services. If she were in a less progressive state she might not think it would even be a possibility.</p>
<p>I live in San Francisco myself, but my mother-in-law lives in Vermont and my husband is visiting her this week. I'll make sure to tell him about this thread when he phones tonight, so he can let his family and friends there know who <em>not</em> to call if they are looking for a photographer.</p>
-
<p>Personally I can't imagine any situation in which $15 an hour would be an appropriate compensation for a paid photographer. If you're doing any prep or post-production work that amount might as well be 0, even if it's tax-free cash. And let me guess, they want all rights to the photos as well?</p>
-
<p>Regardless of your actual legal rights here, Ashley, I do hope that many prospective clients Google your name and are made aware of your attitude when deciding whether or not to book you. </p>
-
<p>And remember that those suggested figures Dave quotes are gross income. After taxes, insurance, promotion, equipment, etc., don't expect to keep more than half of it.</p>
-
<p>Charging an hourly rate doesn't necessarily mean that she's not billing for or planning to do post-production. I too charge an hourly rate with a two-hour minimum, and I do post-production on all photos whether prints or additional high-res images are ordered or not. I assume that I will spend 1-2 hours in post for each 1 hour of shooting (3 hours in the worst case), and charge accordingly.</p>
-
<p>I recently updated my prices and a couple of weeks before the increase I wrote a <a href="http://funcrunchphoto.com/blog/new-rates-20110116">blog entry about it,</a> explaining some of the reasons why. Haven't gotten any feedback thus far. I also sent heads-up notices to a number of customers and potential customers before raising the prices to give them a chance to order before the change. Some took advantage of this, some didn't. *shrug*</p>
-
<p>1. Both Zenfolio and SmugMug offer packages I believe, but I only have experience with Zenfolio's as SmugMug didn't have that functionality while I was hosting with them. Zenfolio's package and discount options are very flexible and highly customizable.</p>
<p>2. I have not set up a domain name with either service but I believe both do offer that option.</p>
<p>3. I left SmugMug for Zenfolio because the former had frequent unplanned downtimes plus a weekly maintenance window that often lasted several hours. They might have improved since then (I started migrating to Zenfolio last spring after over a year on SmugMug) but I am not looking back.</p>
<p>4. I have been happy with the prints from both services, but the Bay Photo pro lab option SmugMug uses produced particularly beautiful prints for me. The shipping cost for Mpix, the default Zenfolio lab, is somewhat high.</p>
-
<p>ETA: Soon after posting my first response, I read that Mozy is no longer offering unlimited online backup. (I was only using their free 2GB plan for small files anyway.)</p>
-
<p>Mozy and Carbonite both have unlimited online backup plans for reasonable prices, the latter only from your internal drive, which does limit things. My DSL upload speed is too slow to take advantage of these (we've tried to upgrade but can't get any faster in our area). So I use a Drobo and send an external 2TB drive out-of-state occasionally as extra insurance. Internal 2TB disks are only around $100 now; I recently upgraded two of the 1TB disks in my Drobo with these.</p>
-
<p>I'm very happy with Zenfolio as well, though I still have a separate gateway site with information about my business and links to my galleries. SEO is definitely lacking as Kevin notes, but that's my only real complaint thus far.</p>
-
<p>No inclement weather here in beautiful San Francisco, but my photo efforts were still indoors, mostly at Macworld Expo. The event was sadly lacking this year unless you're in the market for iPad or iPhone accessories, but I attended all three days of the expo anyway as there were several musical performances I was interested in watching and shooting. This shot is from the Advanced Jazz Band of the Urban School of San Francisco; very talented group of kids.<br>
<a title="Urban School of San Francisco at Macworld Expo by funcrunch, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5016/5405854120_cd81a2dcdc_o.jpg" alt="Urban School of San Francisco at Macworld Expo" width="580" height="500" /></a><br>
Canon 5D Mk II, 85mm f/1.8, 1/125, ISO 1600.</p>
-
<p>Each photo in the slideshow has the photographer's name listed in the caption to the right of the photo. Is there another place the attribution should be listed?</p>
-
<p>This is a slight aside to the original question, but given the global community here I think it would be really helpful for posters to specify their location up-front when asking any pricing advice (legal advice, too).</p>
-
<p>Doing a favor for a friend is a little different than working for free for a magazine, IMHO. </p>
-
<p>I don't see a problem with adding it to a list of services you're willing to do, as long as you're upfront and honest when clients ask to see some images of previous weddings you've shot. No one will actually book a photographer for a wedding without asking about prior experience, and if they're still willing to hire you with no previous wedding experience, then great - everyone has to start somewhere!</p>
-
<p>On Jan 2 I went on a walking tour of my own San Francisco neighborhood with my husband and a friend (my friend is developing these tours and we were his guinea pigs). We stopped by the Cable Car Museum, which is just a few blocks from my apartment, but I'd never been inside. I was glad to have an image stabilized lens on hand, so I could hold steady for 1/3 second and get a nice motion blur on the spokes.</p>
<p><a title="Cable Car museum by funcrunch, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5204/5318015721_96f79dcc98_z.jpg" alt="Cable Car museum" width="640" height="427" /></a><br>
Canon 40D, 17-55mm f/2.8 lens at 17mm, 0.3 seconds at f/8, ISO 800.</p>
-
<p>When I put pro-quality photos on Flickr I put them up at a relatively small size (72 dpi, 800 pix or less on the longest side) and include a watermark along the bottom. I also include a link to the pro gallery if I have the same photo hosted there.</p>
-
<p>I've always offered individual digital files for purchase, previously through SmugMug but now through Zenfolio. On Zenfolio if the customer orders several individual images, they are all packaged into a Zip file for easy download. SmugMug didn't have that option at the time I used them (though they may have added it since), which meant a customer had to click to download every single file they purchased.</p>
<p>Another advantage to selling only the files rather than the CD is you don't have to worry about sales tax, as no physical goods change hands.</p>
-
<blockquote>
<p>It doesn’t matter if you are paid by the hour, month or project, when you are selling a service the output of the service belongs to the person or company paying for the service.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The "output of the service" is a <em>license</em> to use the photographs, <em>not</em> the copyright on the images themselves, unless it is explicitly a work for hire situation. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>If you have not formally received rights to the photographs from the organization paying for the images, you don’t own the photographs.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The photographer owns the copyright to the images at the moment the image is captured; this is the default case, you are claiming the reverse. Unless the photographer was an employee of the buyer at the time the photos were captured, then the buyer certainly does not automatically "own" the photographs.</p>
-
<blockquote>
<p> If you have contracted (even verbally) to shoot the photographs and be paid an hourly rate, you are making photographs for hire. When you are “hired” to produce the images, the customer owns the rights to the photographs.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>What does charging an hourly rate have to do with whether it is work for hire or not? Many event photographers including myself charge an hourly rate, and I have always retained the copyrights on my work.</p>
-
<p>I watermark my photos with both my name and web site ("© Julie Bernstein, www.funcrunchphoto.com"), <em>and</em> I submit all photos to the U.S. copyright office. Funcrunch Photo is also the legally registered "Does Business As" on my business license.</p>
Canon Thursday Pic 2011: #6
in Canon EOS Mount
Posted
<p>Nothing new shot this week, so here's another music photo from last month's Macworld Expo. This band (Jonathan Mann and the Rock Cookie Bottoms - awesome funny songs) was performing in front of huge windows, but I still managed to get some decent shots without using a flash or other lighting.<br>
<a title="Jonathan Mann at Macworld Expo by funcrunch, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5176/5405247587_90b1c7e0f4_z.jpg" alt="Jonathan Mann at Macworld Expo" width="580" height="387" /></a><br>
Canon 5D Mk II, 85 mm at f/2.8, 1/200, ISO 400.</p>